(11-21-2014 11:57 PM)Lurker Above Wrote: Exactly. In this scenario Clemson does not play South Carolina, Georgia, Georgia Tech, or FSU. Tennessee would hardly play any SEC teams. Too many examples to list. No way this would even be considered.
To the "no way this would be considered' thing. Don't get me wrong. I get that. In the initial post I spoke to the realism/idealism thing. I have no illusions.
But I do put it out there nonetheless because if you slice the timeline as to how college football has looked at any 25 year point, you find some significant changes. That much is clear.
This just suggests a master plan that might contain some elements that could serve us well as we attempt to get to a place more like virtually all other championships in the world--ie,
the whole enchilada is resolved on the field of play and there is almost no bickering about who had a fair/equal chance to prove themselves and who didn't. That much, I think, the vast majority of us think is a worthy goal.
To the balance of your post... Clemson already has to play South Carolina out-of-conference. That's the real rivalry that I think most would deem worthy of consideration. And there's no change here. They still can and no doubt would do that.
Iowa/Iowa State is the one other in-state rivalry that doesn't benefit from this... and, yet, the same can be said as Clemson/USC.
I have to agree that Tennessee would seem to arguably be one of five schools most disagreeable to this. Like everyone else, they have 3 self-scheduling slots to try to accommodate the rivalries Vols fans hold most dear--Florida, Georgia and Alabama. (I have relatives who live in KnoxVegas, as I did myself back in the Tee Martin era).
The rest of the disagreeables would be the four schools who consider themselves "national" in scope, and so I agree with the one poster who said that Notre Dame would be a "nay" vote, as Brigham Young would probably be, as well as Army and Navy.